Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Carter

Ohio Supreme Court

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Carter

629 N.E.2d 430, 68 Ohio St. 3d 568

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided March 30, 1994·No. No. 93-2177·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We agree that respondent committed the disciplinary violations found by the board. We also agree with the board’s recommendation. Accordingly, respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for a period of two years. The sanction is suspended and respondent is placed on probation for two years, under the conditions recommended by the board. If respondent violates any of those conditions during the probationary period, the two-year term of suspension will be automatically imposed. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Wright, J., not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

We agree that respondent committed the disciplinary violations found by the board. We also agree with the board’s recommendation. Accordingly, respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Ohio for a period of two years. The sanction is suspended and respondent is placed on probation for two years, under the conditions recommended by the board. If respondent violates any of those conditions during the probationary period, the two-year term of suspension will be automatically imposed. Costs taxed to respondent.

Judgment accordingly.

Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Wright, J., not participating.

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Carter, 629 N.E.2d 430, 68 Ohio St. 3d 568 (Ohio 1994).

Pincite

629 N.E.2d 430 (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Carter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related